moderncombatfandomcom-20200222-history
User blog:EndZone45/What MC5 Did Wrong
What MC5 did wrong. We all know (except for the six-year old kids who were late to the party) that the premium-quality Modern Combat games developed by Gameloft Montreal were better than the sad-looking, latest embarrassment from Gameloft Bucharest. We waited for MC5 for 2 years. The game should have been polished. But when the game came out, it was a Red-34 fest, and the graphics and overall gameplay was not on par. As the game progressed up to now, its been a Bosk and LGR fest. So here are some things that really ticked me off on Modern Combat 5: Blackout, and what Gameloft could do for MC6 (if they are creating some) Note: #1 and #2 are my biggest problems with the game, the others could go any which way. 1. This is one we are all going to agree on. It's weapon balance. MC4's weapon balance wasn't all that great either. We had weapons like the Compakt-665, which was an assault rifle with several benefits of an SMG. We had Kobalszky sticky grenade launchers with Explosives Expert. The blast radius of those were absolutely game breaking. Another weapon worth mentioning (even though I don't consider it very OP like the two I just mentioned) was the Charbtek-28. Yes, it had very high damage and yes, it had great range and top-tier rate of fire. But it had very bad handling and mobility traits, which was a great balancing factor. Not to mention the recoil and horrible hip fire. But MC4's weapon balance is hella lot better than MC5's. All you see are Bosk Pros, LGRs, PR39s, and E24 SASRs. My idea of hell. Also, why are shotguns so weak in this game? MC4 nailed the balance with the shotgun category. One extremely powerful, slow firing weapon, the R780, one semi-auto, mid-high damage CTK-1410, and one low damage, low range but full auto Volkhov-12. Whichever one you favour most, there's no denying that these shotguns destroy in close quarters, which is what shotguns are all about. Shotguns should annihilate in close-quarters, nothing else. MC5 takes a different direction and makes the shotguns as weak as slapping enemies with soggy, limp, wet noodles. 2. Gun variety. Yes, MC4 didn't have LMGs and MC3 only had two LMGs. MC5 has all of the categories, which is great. But gun variety was a problem. We may have had different types of weapons, but the weapons in classes were basically identical, bar the Charbtek-28 and KR-200 in the assault rifle class for MC5. Let's start with the pistols. Ysbert mentioned this in his September 2014 review for MC5. MC4 had three handguns, but all three of them were different. We had the Schoc 33, a low-damage, high rate of fire burst weapon. We had the Black Mamba, my personal favourite of the three, which was a high-damage, single-action weapon. And then we had a very balanced Viny Pro, which was full-auto with decent damage but small clip. MC5 has 7 handguns, but they are all clones of each other. All of them fire identically, bar the Ratog. The Luks-MK2 is basically an MSG 33 in a different skin, and the Hawk-13 was basically a weaker Mrager. Also (I know this is not entirely relevant to the topic) but whoever designed the pistol ADS at Bucharest should be shot. Pistol ADS in MC5 is awful. Assault rifles! The Red-34 is basically a superior version of the UFIA! The PR39 is basically a KOG where you don't have to ADS for the damage boost! And don't get me started on the sniper rifles. The semi-auto sniper rifles are just clones of each other, some with higher rate of fire, some with higher damage and some with ridiculously high magazine counts (especially the E24). 3. Looking back, this should have been #2. It is hit detection. MC3 had good hit detection. People died when you shot them, even if it was a really weak weapon like the Maiden. MC4 had the best hit detection I have seen in a mobile game, if not better than the hit detection I've seen in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 or Advanced Warfare. Where could the series go from then? Up, of course. But MC5 had terrible, terrible hit detection. People would just soak up bullets and not die. It was like I had went to a supermarket and lifted a thirty-kilogram box of what I thought was rice, but then it all spilled out and it turned out to be not rice, but hitmarkers. Imagine all those hitmakers spilling onto your screen. This concern leads directly into my next problem with MC5! 4. KNIFERS. I always said that the Compakt-665 was the most game breaking thing about MC4, but despite the abundance of Compakt tryharders, you can actually combat the Compakt. Knifers are so hard to combat. One, they use pistols, so they run at you from across the map. 2. I don't know if its just me, but knifers take so many hitmakers before they die. That is why (even though I hate the LGR) the LGR is my backup, but I don't use the LGR as my primary. I use it against knifers exclusively. The animation in MC5 for knifing is very good and brutal, but it takes forever. If you ask me, I would prefer a lame knife animation that is instant rather than some brutal one that leaves you vulnerable for a millennium. MC4's knife animation is what I'm talking about. Simple. Fast. Great for sticky situations. Also, MC4 and MC3 didn't have knifers because the hit detection was right in those two games and not f**ked up and inconsistent like it was in MC5! 5. I know everyone's not going to agree with me on this one, but hey, my blog post, my ideas, right? And that is gore. MC3 introduced taking off limbs, which was absolutely insane and so fun. MC4 took it to a whole new level with decapitating heads. I know that not everyone agrees with that, but decapitating people's heads was an absolute blast. It was also hilarious to see the head go flying off the body like a basketball. MC5 doesn't have gore. Not a single bit. Sure, you have the knife animation and the blood flying everywhere if you score a direct hit with the launcher, but none of those add to the cinematic appeal to MC5. 6. Killsigns. Killsigns in MC3 were nice. I'm totally aware that MC2 had them as well, but MC3 really started Modern Combat off with the icon, the title and the sound effect that plays. MC4 also had great killsigns, like the gold background topped with the title "Most Expensive Signature". For me, killsigns have always been a hilarious way to troll your enemy when you kill them, and having the death noises is actually, in my opinion, a stronger way to troll and infuriate your enemy than the immature and lame T-bag. So MC5 was a huge disappointment with the killsigns. The only thing you could customise was your picture, which was just... lame. Not much to say about that. i know that all of you that have played MC3 or MC4 know what I'm talking about. 7. Animations. The only animation that Bucharest nailed was the knifing animation, however, it did take time to complete. But sprinting animations with MC5 are just... awkward. Especially with the grenade launchers and SMGs. If you have the Recon perk which allows you to keep your SMG raised while sprinting, you look like a complete joke. Its almost like you're on a cloud, floating around. 8. Killstreaks! MC3 got us started off with the Call of Duty inspired kill streaks, and like they were in Call of Duty, they were fun as hell. The only bummer about kill streaks for me is that you can't control them. Controlling the ground or hover drone in MC4 would have been sick. Anyway, MC3 gave us radars, turrets, airstrikes, bombers, and most importantly of all (even though it was a clear ripoff from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2) was the NUKE. The Nuke was awesome. MC4 continued with kill streaks, albeit more innovative than the previous Modern Combat game. We had drones, advanced recon aircrafts, artilleries, EMPs, and Bombers, just like in MC3. MC4 also gave us customisable kill streaks, so we could choose what three kill streaks we wanted, as opposed to MC3, where all the kill streaks were given to you. So it was very disappointing to find in MC5 that we have non-customisable, limited kill streaks. On the support class, we had the papier-mâché made Recon Aircraft, which literally takes a few shots with any weapon to down, as opposed to MC4 where you would need a CTK-88 Crumplor (Which for me was a good thing having to use a rocket launcher to take it down). We had the auto-turret, which was a peashooter, and the EMP strike, which could be annoying, but not as effective as the EMP in MC4. We all know what kill streaks are in the Assault class. One thing I do like about the air strike in MC5 though, is that you have to select where it should bomb, as opposed to previous titles where you would just hit the button, which for me was lame in MC4 and MC3. Not only that, airstikes in MC3 and MC4 had dead-on accuracy. 9. Grenade spam. There is no disagreeing on this one. If you upgrade your perks, the Assault class can have up to 4 grenades, which is WAY too many. All you see in multiplayer lobbies are Assaulters running the fully-upgraded perk and spamming impact grenades everywhere. Impact grenades act similarly to the Concussion grenade in MC4, with a tiny radius but one hit anywhere within the radius. All you see are desperate noobs spamming their grenades in your face. 10. Mandatory connection for single and multiplayer. Why the f*ck would Bucharest thing it was the right idea to have an internet connection to play even single player. What were they thinking? The strengths of previous MCs were that you could play their exciting single player even when you didn't have access to a WiFi connection. And then MC5 comes along with a drunk Bucharest employee chanting, "If you don't have internet connection, you will be punished!" Anyway, those are my 10 big ideas of what MC5 did wrong. Category:Blog posts